PAVANA G P Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri.B.C.Seetharama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners. Smt.Lavanya.S, learned counsel for Sri.Vignesh Shetty for respondent No.1.

(2.) The writ petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

(3.) In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 09.10.2009 passed by the Recovery Officer as well as the order dated 24.07.2017 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short). The petitioners also seeks quashment of attachment of the suit property dated 01.08.2016.